https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult
Would Tony say this? - “We only have to copy the past. Look how successful they
were. Why rock the boat with new info?”
Our electrical
theory has grown like a ramshackle farmhouse which has been added to, and
improved, by the additions of successive tenants to satisfy their momentary
needs, and with little regard for the future. We regard it with affection. We
have grown used to the leaks in the roof .... But our haphazard house cannot
survive for ever, and it must ultimately be replaced by a successor whose
beauty is of structure rather than of sentiment.
- H W Heckstall-Smith, Intermediate Electrical Theory, pub. Dent,
1932, p283.
Google
search for “science is the search for truth” gives 3,000,000 hits. Now for the
betrayers;
Its
new betrayal; http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x231.pdf
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/davies.pdf
“Deciding about ‘truth’ is the
domain of philosophers; and engineers, scientists
and technologists are wise to keep away from that in their work.” –
Tony Davies, 3.1.2020
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x231.pdf
The trouble is, the instrumentalists who today command all the commanding
heights of “science” may not know any philosophy of science, history of
science, sociology of science. John Dore FIEE only now (after 40 years) told me
he did not care whether he was on the side of Galileo or Bellarmino!
Why have I only now realised that the story of “The Glitch” is incompatible
with instrumentalism? It must be that I failed to study a philosophy as absurd
as “The Truth that there are no truths”. But now these absurd people control
all of what was “science”, and block scientific advance, which would cause a
hiccough in their careers. A glittering career needs a stable launch-pad.
“Research” has to be limited to adding decoration to the established canon.
They call this “academia and structured research”. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x59v.pdf
Better version; http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x8cktony.pdf
The
Betrayal of Science
Oliver
Heaviside
327
ELECTROMAGNETIC THEORY. Vol. 1, 1893, CH. IV,
If you have got anything new, in substance or in method, and want to propagate it rapidly, you need not
expect anything but hindrance from the old practitioner even though he sat at the feet of Faraday. Beetles
could do that. Besides, the old practitioner is apt to measure the value of science by the number of .dollars he thinks it is likely to bring into his pocket,
and if he does not see the dollars, he is very disinclined to disturb his ancient prejudices. But only give him plenty of rope,
and when the new views have become fashionably
current, he may find it worth his while to adopt them, though, perhaps, in a somewhat sneaking manner,
not unmixed with bluster, and make believe he knew all about it when he was a little boy.
He sees a
prospect of dollars in the distance, that is the reason.
338
ELECTROMAGNETIC THEORY. CH. IV.
The perfect
obstruction having failed, try the perfect conduction. You should make your
converts out of the
rising generation and the coming men. – Oliver
Heaviside
[Heaviside is
wrong here. “The coming men” are only interested in passing exams, and dislike
uncertainty. – IC 27.1`2.2018]
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/wxyz.pdf
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/44.htm
http://www.electromagnetism.demon.co.uk/news2000.htm
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x231.pdf
The Instrumentalist’s Manifesto
[It is only a theory that phlogiston does not exist. When teaching, the
more clutter, the better. Keeps them quiet.]
Tue, Dec 18,2018, 10.21 PM ( http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/d.htm
Theories C, D)
Professor Tony Davies was on the
Board of Directors of the IEEE, 400,000 members, the senior institution for
electromagnetic theory.
|
Tony
Davies, |
|
|
|
|
|||
For what it is worth, just a brief comment based on a quick read of
this:
While I was an electrical engineering undergraduate at Southampton
University (from where I left with a BSc(Eng) in 1961 to go to GEC in Coventry, it was my understanding that Theory H was the
'correct one'. and I have not had any reason so far to change that view. That is not to say
the Theory H is correct, there might be something better, but I do not know
enough of field theory to decide about that.
As
I have mentioned before my 'roots' are in circuit theory which I have never
claimed to be a description of reality, but is an extremely helpful basis for
designing useful things, which have performance close enough to the results
from circuit theory that this is sensible and for many applications remains the
best way to get to those useful outcomes.
[Tony will not answer the question; “Should
you knowingly lie to students in order to help an electrician to wire up a
house? - IC]
Do not forget that since there is no distance dimension in circuit
theory, a transmission line approximated by one thousand ideal capacitors and
inductors (of the text book type) can easily be fitted on to the point of a
very sharp pin (and there is stilll room for all those medieval angels as well, if you choose to
also believe in that).
Perhaps some would wonder why Theory N persists if it is
incorrect. Leaving out the complexity of understanding what ExH means, and describing electricity by analogy with
water flowing through pipes, etc. has been and still is, a sufficient
explanation for many amateur and professional electrical technicians who have
to install and repair electrical installations in buildings and understand the
IET Wiring Regulations, etc. For the general non-scientific public
it is probably better to tell them that electricity is a flow of electrons and
that these can move quite freely in a conductor, making it warm in the process,
and melting it if there is too much current because it gets too
warm. Such ideas are helpful in other situations such as the design
of water-based piped central heating systems where the designer has to work out
the required pump pressure (like voltage) and the diameter of the pipes (like
resistors) in order to carry the required water flow (like current) to the
radiators (which are actually producing most of their heat by convection rather
than radiation). It is only necessary to know that the 'resistance'
has a square law relationship to pump pressure and water flow to understand
that the iterative calculations done by central heating designers are what an
electric circuit engineer would do to analyse electrical resistive networks
made up of square law resistors - e.g. it is not just linear simultaneous
equations, one has to use an iterative method such as Newton-Raphson (which, of
course is unknown to most central heating installers). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_method
I hope that all this gives you something nice to dream about over the
coming holiday season.
Tony Davies
2018 Dec 18th
John Dore FIET says
he agrees with the above
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
John Dore FIET recently said he does not care whether he is on the side
of Galileo or Bellarmino.
Any denial by him will be added here.
From Dore; My research interests trump wasted thoughts! ... be
productive for a change!!! 16.3.2019
|
Inbox |
x |
|
Mon, Mar 18, 12:02 PM (1 day ago) |
|
||
|
||||
Ivor,
My research interests include:
1. Computer simulation and emulation in both
hardware (fpga and micro computers)
2. Macros and macro compilers and
compiler-compilers
3. Finite element methods for structures and
electrical problems
4. Parallel computing
These are quite enough to occupy me constructively
I would draw your attention to courses run by mooc contributor edx
eg structures run by
Princeton university at zero cost
I have recently completed such a course on the
design of shell roofs.
It includes appropriate computations.
I think what I am doing is far more valuable than
contemplating truths, facts and the various philosophical diversions in which
you seek to interest yourself.
There have always been dysfunctional families
throughout history but in Roman times knife crime was committed by the well
healed from good families.
The reason for knife crime in the UK is a function
of the availability and use of drugs predominately by a particular segment of
society.
It would be good if you could make it to the
lecture just off the Strand at BCS HQ next Thursday at 2:30pm. You just book
online CCS BCS
Happy cogitating
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
http://www.ivorcatt.com/2607.htm
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
From Wikipedia, the
free encyclopedia
.jpg)
Electromagnetism for Engineers: An Introductory Course
(Textbooks in ...
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Electromagnetism-Engineers-Introductory.../0198562993
https://archive.org/stream/electromagnetict01heavrich/electromagnetict01heavrich_djvu.txt - Oliver Heaviside
But
the old established practitioner with prejudices, who could not
see
the reason, was put into a position of some difficulty
resembling
chancery. If you
have got anything new, in
substance or in method, and want to propagate it rapidly,,
you need not expect anything but hindrance from the old
practitioner even though he sat at the feet of Faraday.
Beetles could do that. Besides,
the old practitioner is apt
to
measure the value of science by the number of .dollars-
he
thinks it is likely to bring into his pocket, and if he
does
not see the dollars, he is very disinclined to disturb his
ancient
prejudices. But
only give him plenty of rope, and
when the new views have become fashionably current, he may~
find it worth his while to adopt them, though, perhaps, i
a somewhat sneaking manner, not
unmixed with bluster, and
make
believe he knew all about it when he was a little boy t
He
sees a prospect of dollars in the distance, that is the-
338
ELECTROMAGNETIC THEORY. CH. IV.
reason.
The perfect obstruction having fciiled, try the
perfect conduction.
You
should make your converts out of the rising generation
and
the coming men. Thus, passing to another matter, Prof.
Tait
says he cannot understand my vectors, though he can
understand
much harder things. But men who have no quater-
nionic
prejudices can understand them, and do. Younger
men
are born into the world with more advanced ideas, on
the
average. There cannot be a doubt about it. If you had
taught
the Calculus to the ancient Britons you would not
have
found a man to take it in amongst the whole lot, Druids
and
all. Consider too, what a trouble scientific men used
to
have with the principle of the persistence of energy. They
could
not see it. But everybody sees it now. The important
thing
is to begin early, and train up the young stick as you
want
it to grow. Now with Quaternions it is different.
You
may put off till to-morrow what you cannot do to-day,
for
fear you commence the study too soon. Of course, I"
refer
to the Hamilton-Tait system, where you have to do
violence
to reason by making believe that a vector is a
quaternion,
and that its square is negative.
According
to Ohm's law alone, a perfect conductor should be
one
which carried an infinite current under a finite voltage,
and
the current would flow all through it because it does so
ordinarily.
But what is left out of consideration here is the
manner
in which the assumed steady state is established. If
we
take this into account, we find that there is no steady state
when
the resistance is zero, for the variable period is infinitely
prolonged,
and Ohm's law is therefore out of it, so far as the
usual
application goes. In a circuit of no resistance containing
a
finite steady impressed voltage E, the current would mount
up
infinitely and never stop mounting up. On the other hand,
if
we insert a resistance R in the former circuit of no resistance,
there
will be a settling to a steady state, for the current in the
circuit
will tend to the value E/R, in full obedience to Ohm's
law.
The current is the same all round the circuit,
although
a
part thereof has no resistance. We conclude that that
portion
has also no voltage.
But
this is only a part of the story. Although we harmonise
with
Ohm's law, we overlook the most interesting part. The
THEORY
OF PLANE ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES. 339
smaller
the resistance the greater the time taken for the
current
to get into the conductor from its boundary, where it
is
initiated. In the limit, with no resistance, it never gets in
at
all. Where, then, is the current? For, as we have said,
it
mounts up to a finite value if there be a finite resistance
inserted
along with the perfect conductor, and mounts up
infinitely
if there be no resistance.
We
recognise the existence of electric current in a wire by
the
magnetic force round it, and in fact measure the current
by
its magnetic force. Therefore, according to this, there is
the
same total current in the wire, if the magnetic force out-
side
it remains the same. If, then, the magnetic force stops
completely
at the surface of the wire, whose interior is entirely
free
from magnetic force, the measure of the current is just
the
same. The uniformly distributed current of the steady
state
appropriate to finite conductivity becomes a mere surface
current
when the conductivity is infinite. In one case we
have
a finite volume-density of current, and in the other a
finite
surface-density. When the current inside the wire is
zero
so is the electric force, in accordance with Ohm's law
again.
The electric and magnetic phenomena are entirely in
the
dielectric outside the wire, the entrance of any similar
manifestations
into it being perfectly obstructed by the absence
of
resistance. For this purpose the thinnest skin would serve
equally
well. In the usual sense that an electric current is a
phenomenon
of matter, it has become quite an abstraction, for
there
is no matter concerned in it It is shut out
completely.
In
the circuit of finite resistance, a portion of which is a wire
of
no resistance, supporting a steady current, there is no
difference
whatever in the external, magnetic force outside the
resisting
and non-resisting parts, though in one case there is
entrance
of the magnetic force and waste of energy, whilst in
the
other there is no entrance and no waste. These con-
clusions
do not rest upon Maxwell's theory of dielectrics, but
upon
the second circuital law of electromagnetism applied to
conductors.
But it is only by means of Maxwell's theory that
we
can come to a proper understanding and explanation of the
functions
of conductors.
The
sense in which a perfect conductor is a perfect con-
ductor
in reality as well as in name is that it allows electro-
z2
310
ELECTROMAGNETIC THEORY CIL IV.
magnetic
waves to slip along its surface in a perfectly free-
manner,
without waste of energy. Though perfectly obstruc-
tive
internally, it is perfectly conductive superficially. It
merely
guides the waves, and in this less technical sense of
conduction
the idea of a perfect conductor acquires fresh life.
The
Effect of a Perfect Conductor on External Disturb-
ances.
Reflection and Conduction of Waves.
190.
The conditions at the interface of a perfect conductor
and
a dielectric are that the electric force in the dielectric has-
no
tangential component and the magnetic induction no normal
component.
Or
VNE
= 0, NH = 0,
if
N be the unit normal from the conductor. Thus, when
there
is electric force at the boundary it is entirely normal,
with
electrification to match ; and if there is magnetic
force it
is
entirely tangential, with electric current to match. Both
electrification
and current are superficial. The displacement
measures
the surface density a- of the one, and the magnetic*
force
that of the other, say c, thus
<r
= ND, c = VNH,
in
rational units, without any useless and arbitrary 4?r
constant,,
such
as is required in the B.A. system of units, of amazing
irrationality.
If, then, we have electromagnetic disturbances
given
in a dielectric containing a perfect conductor, the latter
first
of all is free from disturbance, and next causes such re-
flected
waves as to annihilate the tangentiality of the electric
force
and the normality of the magnetic force.
As
regards steady states, the influence of a perfect conductor
on
induction due to foreign sources is to exclude it in the same
manner
as if the inductivity were made zero ; that is, the induc-
tion
goes round it tangentially instead of entering it. This
is
usually ascribed to an electric current-sheet induced upon it&
surface,
whose internal magnetic force is the negative of that
due
to the external field. This is right mathematically, but is
deceptive
and delusive physically. There is no internal force,,
neither
that of the external field nor that of the superficial
current.
The current sheet itself merely means the abrupt
THEORY
OF PLANE ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES. 341
stoppage
of the magnetic field, and cannot really be supposed
to
be the source of magnetic force in a body which cannot
permit
its entrance. The previously mentioned case of a per-
fectly
conducting wire inserted in a circuit of finite resistance
supporting
a steady current, will serve to bring out this point
strongly.
The supposed induced superficial current is now
actually
the main current in the circuit itself.
It
is different with the steady state due to external electric
sources.
The displacement is just as much shut out from the
perfect
conductor (which may also be a dielectric) as was the
magnetic
induction, but in a strikingly different manner, ter-
minating
upon it perpendicularly, as if it entered it in the
manner
that would happen were the conductor nonconducting,
but
of exceedingly great permittivity, so that it drew in the
tubes
of displacement.
Although
a perfect magnetic conductor is, in the absence of
knowledge
even of a finite degree of magnetic conductivity, a
very
far-fetched idea, yet it is useful in electromagnetic theory
to
contrast with the perfect electric conductor. A perfect
magnetic
conductor behaves towards displacement just as a
perfect
electric conductor does towards induction ; that is,
the
displacement
goes round it tangentially. It also behaves
towards
induction as a perfect electric conductor does towards
displacement
; that is, the induction meets it perpendicularly,
as
if it possessed exceedingly great inductivity, without
magnetic
conductivity. This magnetic conductor is also per-
fectly
obstructive internally, and is a perfect reflector, though
not
quite in the same way as electric conductors. The tan-
gential
magnetic force and the normal electric force are zero.
As
regards waves, there are two extreme ways in which a
perfect
conductor behaves that is, extreme forms of the gene-
ral
behaviour. It may wholly conduct them, or it may wholly
reflect
them. In the latter case we may illustrate by ima-
gining a
thin plane electromagnetic sheet, consisting of crossed
electric
and magnetic forces in the ratio given by E = /*vH,
moving
at the speed of light, to strike a perfect conductor
flush
that is, all over at the same time, by reason of parallel-
ism
of the sheet and conducting surface. The incident sheet
is
at once turned into another plane sheet, which runs away
from
the conductor as fast as it came. If the conductivity be
342
ELECTROMAGNETIC TEIEORY. OIL IV.
of
the electric kind the reflected sheet differs from the incident
in
having its displacement reversed, but in no other respect*
This
is perfect reflection with reversal of E. During the act
of
reflection, whilst the incident and reflected sheets partly coin-
cide,
E is zero and H is doubled. Both are tangential ; but
there
can be no tangential E, so the reflector destroys E and
initiates
the reflected sheet, in which H is the same as in the
incident
sheet, whilst E is reversed.
On
the other hand, when the conductivity is of the magnetic
kind,
the reflected wave sheet differs from the incident only in
having
its induction reversed. The displacement persists,
being
doubled during the act of reflection, whilst the induction
is
then annulled.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archibald_Howie
re cattq, http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm
, Howie is a
westerner. Pepper, who reported to him as head of the Cavendish, is a
southerner. (Both at Trinity.) They refuse to discuss their disagreement with
each other or with us..
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x67d.htm
Re: em
|
Inbox |
x |
||||
|
|
10:08 AM (8 hours ago) |
|
|||
|
|||||
29.3.2019
|
10:08 AM (8 hours ago) |
|
||
|
||||
Dear
Ivor,
Thanks for our message. I admire your
tenacity over EM theory which I'm
sure keeps your brain firing away. I have never
met Alex Yakovlev and
had not even heard of him until maybe 6 months
ago I came across his
Phil Trans paper with its fulsome references to
the work of you and your
colleagues. Following our strenuous but
unsuccessful efforts many years
ago to resolve the difference between us, I am
however not at all
attracted by the idea of revisiting them!
In the past few months the "standard"
EM theory that you dislike [no; I
want to be told what it is! See cattq.]
I have
been applying to compute the energy loss
experienced by a fast electron
beam. This travels in the z direction and is
highly focused to about
0.2nm in the x-y plane, when it passes just
outside a dielectric
material. This theory gives a very good account
of many experimental
observations. Of course by some amazing fluke it
may still succeed when
built on a foundation [Howie’s or Pepper’s?] that
you believe to be incorrect but so far I am
not convinced. [Why does he not discuss his
disagreement with Pepper on fundamentals - cattq? –
IC]
Here we see that Howie
is an instrumentalist. - IC
You may recall that long ago I encouraged you to
get your ideas
published in Physics Education in the guise of a
challenge to the
teaching of EM. I shared some of your
disappointment and frustration
when, after accepting it, they pulled out from
publication.
[ http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x18j34.pdf p38 ref.1
[ Inst Phys broke
their contract to publish it
[ after accepting for publication
Later published here;
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x18j41.pdf
At least Yakovlev has now managed to get some account of your theory
published in
the scientific literature and we can await
reactions. I am not too
confident that much will emerge however since
the serious readership of
most published papers is
now close to zero. Most papers or now read by
bots as I discovered when a paper I recently
submitted to
Ultramicroscopy was accepted. Within a few
hours (while it was still
listed as an on-line paper in the publication
pipeline) I got first an
email from some organisation telling me that a
number of people had
already consulted my paper and that I could find
out who they were by
signing up with them. Hard on the heels of this
came a second message
offering for sale a mug on which the first page
of my paper would be
printed!
Best wishes,
Archie.
“Physics Education
…. …. I shared some of your disappointment and frustration
when, after accepting it, they pulled out from
publication.” – AH
A few decades later
the journal published an attack on me and the editor refused to let me reply.
“Physics Education”, a journal of the Institute of Physics.
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x311a.htm
On 2019-03-28 21:11, Ivor
Catt wrote:
> Dear Archie,
> I would greatly value your comment on
> HTTP://WWW.IVORCATT.CO.UK/YAK7.HTM [1]
> Ivor
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/yak7.htm
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x94sorcerer.htm
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x67d.htm
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/3600.htm
…. ….
“For my part, I assert that the concept "Energy" was
propounded. This is absolutely true, and has nothing to do with my point of
view. It is an objective fact, not subjective. It is also absolutely true that
no other person slept in my bed last night, apart from me. This is not a
subjective view; it is objective fact. It is absolutely true that at this
moment I am typing into a computer. We are immersed in a sea of objective
facts. (We have direct access to them, not needing the mediation of paid
knowledge brokers.) Anyone who denies the existence of these facts must deny
the purpose of any communication whatsoever, and so should shut up.
Communication is a superstructure based on an array of agreed absolute facts.
Denial of the existence of any facts necessarily implies denial of the
possibility of communication. We are left merely with mutually supportive
noises of uncertain import.
In a lecture, the test of absolute truth is to ask a dissident in the
audience whether it is absolutely true that he is attempting to listen to a
lecture. If he demurs, he has to be ejected from the lecture hall because he is
an intellectual terrorist. He denies the possibility of developing and
extending a body of knowledge. The fact that he is merely going along with the
vandals who have captured learning throughout most of the twentieth century
does not excuse his nihilism.
For my part, I say that I hereby intend to write a sentence which starts
and ends with the word "For". I have also probably succeeded, but
this next step is unnecessary in order to establish an absolute truth, about my
intention. Even more succinct, I intended to start and end a sentence with the
same word. Absolutely true. Anyone who disputes this is disputing the
possibility of any meaningful communication whatsoever, and so should not be
talking, since they believe they are wasting their and our time. Disputing the
validity of this exercise, the disputant is asked to communicate something
(anything) within their nihilistic universe of discourse (and such activity
serves a purpose). They will fail. Thus, I believe the assertion "There
are no absolute truths" becomes the assertion "No inter-communication
is possible". Thus, we are left only with "views", or states of
mind, and all we can do is commune together.”